45 thoughts on “The Watering Hole, Wednesday, May 6, 2015”

If you are a person who cares about economic inequality, and the inordinate influence of money on our democracy, and Wall Street’s unaccountability and plunder of public resources—a well-informed person, in other words—you were probably disappointed to learn that Elizabeth Warren would not be running for president, because she is the strongest mainstream political voice in America who speaks out intelligently in favor of addressing those very issues. Some would have you believe that Warren’s decision not to enter the race means that those of you who believe in the causes that she champions should not slide over into the camp of The Inevitable Nominee Hillary Clinton, who will reward you with, perhaps, a gentle leftward nod and wink during the course of her staunchly centrist campaign.

“There are frequent references to a Warren wing of the Democratic party and to the need to appeal to it,” Bloomberg writes. “Hillary Clinton, the Democratic front-runner, is openly courting her.” In the New Yorker, Ryan Lizza says that “Clinton has taken notice” of Warren, already making overt efforts to enfold her in the comforting embrace of Planet Hillary.

—-

Compare the positions of Bernie Sanders with those of Elizabeth Warren. Anyone who feels strongly about the economic and social causes championed by Warren will have little choice but to recognize that Bernie Sanders fully embraces most of the same causes, and the same policy solutions. There is no need to make some emotional, over-the-top, campaign ad-style plea here. Look at what the candidates believe. Vote for the candidate who represents what you believe.

Three and a half decades of rising inequality must stop, or else. Bernie Sanders should have the support of everyone in this country smart enough to understand that. Everyone including Elizabeth Warren.

It happened! The conservatives were in power for 44 years and they finally got booted. And I mean BOOTED!!!! NPD won a very surprising majority government and the PC’s are now third down to just 11 seats from 50+ previously. Quite a change on the political landscape! Three cheers for Rachel Notley.

This was 10 years in the making. The people were tired of the PC’s but didn’t really have much choice. Then the right wing got fractured and a second party, Wildrose (which is our provincial flower btw) came into being. This split the vote on the right side BUT enough people were fare more frightened of the extreme right Wildrose that the NDP gets a majority government with 40% of the popular vote. And it helped to have a smart woman at the head of the NDP. You should see the whining from staunch conservatives! LOL I love it.

“First of all, we have to understand how the Constitution works, the president is required to carry out the laws of the land, the laws of the land come from the legislative branch,” Carson said. “So if the legislative branch creates a law or changes a law, the executive branch has a responsibly to carry it out. It doesn’t say they have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law.”

Apparently all that verbiage in the amended Constitution is of no meaning, and that based on what Carson says he apparently believes that “equal protection” is unconstitutional. How does he reconcile that the 14th amendment’s “equal protection of the laws” guarantee does not apply to what he and other wingnut fear mongers refer to as “marriage equality”?

I gather from Carson’s remarks that if the Court should rule AGAINST marriage equality he’d happily accept their decision even though it would NOT be because the legislative branch had passed such a law for them to rule on — which would in any case be a violation of amendment one’s “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” clause, since the only arguments against marriage equality are religion-based, etc. etc. ad infinitum.

I’m thinking it would be a lot simpler if the SCOTUS would rule in favor of marriage equality and thus give God all the reason It needs to destroy the world, to finally erase that fucking mistake It made 6000 years ago when It created it.

All of which makes me figure that if any mythical god actually existed, it would be laughing its ass off at the antics of our wingnut religious freaks.

I’m not any more of a lawyer than Ben Carson, but as I understand it, there’s no such thing as a “judicial law.” All laws passed, including those by Congress, must be Constitutional. That’s what the Judicial Branch decides (among other things.) If Congress passes a law banning same sex marriage and the SCOTUS says it’s unconstitutional, then it becomes null and void and no president has to execute it. Of course, I could be wrong. I often am.

I agree. The thing I don’t get is why congress should even have to pass such a law when the fourteenth amendment already guarantees absolute equality in virtually anything. For the SCOTUS to rule in favor of gay marriage would, seems to me, be a verification of the fourteenth and NOT as Carson calls it a “judicial law.”

Or maybe I just don’t understand the hidden meanings of “equality,” how that since the buybull doesn’t seem to give the OK to single gender marriage that therefore it’s illegal anyway, even though there’s no mention of god or bible or Jesus or Leviticus or any other of that claptrap in the Constitution, in which case the court would be making a “jucidial law” which would be fine with Carson, etc etc.

It’s a bitch not to be driven by hate and fear. The world is so less clear. Or more clear, whichever.😯

The laws of the land come from the legislative branch?
Ummm, there’s this thingy called the “Constitution”, which, at last glance, didn’t come from any legislative branch.
When the SCROTUS rules on the Constitutionality of a law, that too becomes the ‘law of the land’. Mucking Foron.
What ConLaw class did this idiot flunk out of?
Shite!

LA Times: “An aide to (CA) state Atty. Gen. Kamala D. Harris and two others are accused of operating a rogue police force that claimed to exist for more than 3,000 years and have jurisdiction in 33 states and Mexico”

There’s an election in Great Britain and Northern Ireland tomorrow. There was a time when this meant something and there were discussions about important issues and genuine differences. I see not a lot of discussion, more a sense of hopelessness that their vote will change anything, I see no valuable contribution from the media in all of this…..

“WASHINGTON, May 6 (Reuters) – Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania told Fox News on Wednesday he will announce on May 27 whether he will seek the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

A staunch social conservative, Santorum finished second to eventual Republican nominee Mitt Romney in 2012.

Santorum’s website said “a special announcement” would be made in Pittsburgh on the evening of May 27.

If he enters the race, Santorum would join a field that so far includes Senators Rand Paul of Kentucky, Ted Cruz of Texas and Marco Rubio of Florida; former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee; former Hewlett-Packard Co chief Carly Fiorina; and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson.”